One of the benefits of going with a standard PC architecture is that when you do the PS 5 (or XBone 2) in 6-7 years, you can just use the latest/greatest AMD chips and it will be backward compatible.

It's sad that when the last xbox 360 or PS3 dies, all that software will also die. I love being able to play System Shock 2 or Total Annihilation or Master of Magic or Alpha Centauri still, all of which I've played within the last few years.

They could even go with an Intel or Nvidia setup if that was the best move 6 years from now. Going with an x86 console with standard video hardware is an extremely smart move and really gives them no excuse to ditch backwards compatibility in the future.

Every time you preorder a game, you become part of the problem. Don't be part of the problem.

jdreyer wrote on Jun 21, 2013, 14:06:Can you imagine ever needing a kinect for anything?

No. The actual only thing about the one-eighty that even remotely interested me was that it comes with Skype integration. I skype with my parents every week, and do so on a fairly small laptop screen with a fairly shitty camera. The idea of being able to do so on my plasma with a 1080p camera is enticing.

Beamer wrote on Jun 21, 2013, 13:51:PS has the advantage of Japan, too. Japan didn't take to the 360. It won't take to the One.

Microsoft isn't even selling the Xbone-eighty in Japan, are they? They're just releasing it in 21 countries in total. Apparently this is more "logic" from the brilliant minds that brought you "Here are 10.000 restrictions. FUCKING SUCK IT AND EAT THEM!"

Right, the PS3 had better hardware than the XBox, even unique hardware like blu-ray disc player that the XBox 360 didn't have. But most people didn't care about that. The price put them off, so they went with the cheaper, if less technically impressive, 360.

I think the roles are switched now, except that the kinect 2 is even more superfluous than a BRD player was 7 years ago. At least with BRD you could imagine in the future buying BRDs and wanting to play them. Can you imagine ever needing a kinect for anything?

"The worst of it all is i used to ENJOY getting excited for big titles like this, but these publishers just keep ruining my love for this wonderful hobby with their endless fuckery." - Sempai

MattyC wrote on Jun 21, 2013, 12:47:I was thinking more about overall. I think the PS3 eventually outsold the 360, didn't it? If they keep it much more expensive for a long time I am sure it will kill it.

It wasn't until Sony dropped the price a few times that it really began to take off. Yeah, it has by now outsold the 360 (and if you consider that many 360 users are simply people who bought a new one to replace their previous one which had yet again died, the numbers look more favorable for Sony yet.)

But at the start, its price point was killing it. People weren't buying a $600 game console. Not when two cheaper ones were available.

Creston

PS has the advantage of Japan, too. Japan didn't take to the 360. It won't take to the One. People in Japan that want hardcore games had one option.

The One doesn't have that advantage, as people in the US aren't nearly as MS inclined as people in Japan are Sony inclined. They'll turn on Microsoft in a dime for a better marketed product.

No one is really doing it here, but elsewhere people point out the PS rising in sales over the years as a sign that the price point can be overcome. Yeah, no doubt a price point can be overcome, but Microsoft will have a more difficult time than Sony did.

One of the benefits of going with a standard PC architecture is that when you do the PS 5 (or XBone 2) in 6-7 years, you can just use the latest/greatest AMD chips and it will be backward compatible.

It's sad that when the last xbox 360 or PS3 dies, all that software will also die. I love being able to play System Shock 2 or Total Annihilation or Master of Magic or Alpha Centauri still, all of which I've played within the last few years.

"The worst of it all is i used to ENJOY getting excited for big titles like this, but these publishers just keep ruining my love for this wonderful hobby with their endless fuckery." - Sempai

I can see how Analysts think the PS4 is going to win, at least initially. Anyone that does any amount of research quickly discovers that the PS4 is more powerful, $100 less, backwards compatible and isn't trying to be a home entertainment center in one.

MattyC wrote on Jun 21, 2013, 12:47:I was thinking more about overall. I think the PS3 eventually outsold the 360, didn't it? If they keep it much more expensive for a long time I am sure it will kill it.

It wasn't until Sony dropped the price a few times that it really began to take off. Yeah, it has by now outsold the 360 (and if you consider that many 360 users are simply people who bought a new one to replace their previous one which had yet again died, the numbers look more favorable for Sony yet.)

But at the start, its price point was killing it. People weren't buying a $600 game console. Not when two cheaper ones were available.

InBlack wrote on Jun 21, 2013, 10:47:You can marketspeak all you want but the price difference is where its at. 100$ is nothing to scoff at. People are getting a better console for less money. Thats it.

I really don't know that the launch price matters all that much. Wasn't the PS3 like $600 at launch? I do agree that I think it is a mistake to sell it for that much, but I just don't see it as a fatal price point.

The PS3 also sold like shit when it came out. The true die-hards bought them, of course, but there were PS3s available everywhere. It led to Smedley saying something retarded like "I'll pay $1500 for every PS3 console that's on the shelf!" after which PA went past a few stores and made pictures of dozens of PS3s on shelves everywhere.

The PS3 was about the only console ever that didn't sell out immediately on launch.

Price is definitely, definitely important. Especially if you have a direct competitor who is markedly cheaper.

Creston

I was thinking more about overall. I think the PS3 eventually outsold the 360, didn't it? If they keep it much more expensive for a long time I am sure it will kill it.

InBlack wrote on Jun 21, 2013, 10:47:You can marketspeak all you want but the price difference is where its at. 100$ is nothing to scoff at. People are getting a better console for less money. Thats it.

I really don't know that the launch price matters all that much. Wasn't the PS3 like $600 at launch? I do agree that I think it is a mistake to sell it for that much, but I just don't see it as a fatal price point.

The PS3 also sold like shit when it came out. The true die-hards bought them, of course, but there were PS3s available everywhere. It led to Smedley saying something retarded like "I'll pay $1500 for every PS3 console that's on the shelf!" after which PA went past a few stores and made pictures of dozens of PS3s on shelves everywhere.

The PS3 was about the only console ever that didn't sell out immediately on launch.

Price is definitely, definitely important. Especially if you have a direct competitor who is markedly cheaper.